I think it's a pretty big mistake to try to market a tiny body interchangeable lens system to pros....

But I guess we'll see what the market thinks about this whole thing. It's obvious that Canon seems to agree with me so far (and the G1 X reaffirms that).

I completly agree. The Nikon 1 is not for pros, or even for ambitious amateurs; they may only use it as a second or even third camera to play arround a little bit, a toy. But even then there are better "toys" out there like the Fuji X100.

I think that Canon will introduce an EVIL system in the future, simply because EVIL is the future. There are two big drawbacks at the moment; one is autofocus speed, and the other is the electronic viewfinder. The first is alreday pretty good in an EVIL, while the second one still sucks compared to a pentaprism. But this will change in the future. So the days of the mirror are numbered.

If I were Canon I would develop an APS-C or even FF compatible EVIL system, that coexists with EOS / EF(-S) in the beginning, but will replace it in the future. For the normal consumer I would go with fixed lens systems like the G1X, or for the more ambitous one with an entry-level EVIL camera with the same mount as for the pros (like it has been in the past with analog SLR).

kapanak

I think it's a pretty big mistake to try to market a tiny body interchangeable lens system to pros....

But I guess we'll see what the market thinks about this whole thing. It's obvious that Canon seems to agree with me so far (and the G1 X reaffirms that).

I completly agree. The Nikon 1 is not for pros, or even for ambitious amateurs; they may only use it as a second or even third camera to play arround a little bit, a toy. But even then there are better "toys" out there like the Fuji X100.

I think that Canon will introduce an EVIL system in the future, simply because EVIL is the future. There are two big drawbacks at the moment; one is autofocus speed, and the other is the electronic viewfinder. The first is alreday pretty good in an EVIL, while the second one still sucks compared to a pentaprism. But this will change in the future. So the days of the mirror are numbered.

If I were Canon I would develop an APS-C or even FF compatible EVIL system, that coexists with EOS / EF(-S) in the beginning, but will replace it in the future. For the normal consumer I would go with fixed lens systems like the G1X, or for the more ambitous one with an entry-level EVIL camera with the same mount as for the pros (like it has been in the past with analog SLR).

I have the EVF for the NEX-5N, and although very high resolution and quite impressive, especially with scene preview and live histogram, it still does not have the same natural feeling of an OVF. I don't think mirrorless cameras are meant to replace DSLRs ... mirrored and mirrorless cameras have co-existed since the beginning. They will continue to address different needs in different audiences in the market, and will complement each other in a professional's photography kit.

I have the EVF for the NEX-5N, and although very high resolution and quite impressive, especially with scene preview and live histogram, it still does not have the same natural feeling of an OVF. I don't think mirrorless cameras are meant to replace DSLRs ... mirrored and mirrorless cameras have co-existed since the beginning. They will continue to address different needs in different audiences in the market, and will complement each other in a professional's photography kit.

A DSLR could of course also potentially have a hyrid OVF/EVF aswell to get the advantages from the latter, that and having to balance large zoom lenses will IMHO keep them alive although I do think systems like this new Fuji will take a good deal of the hi end market.

Camera-size means also includes lens size. So for the image quality (and a shallow depth of field) a big sensor is needed, which means big lenses.

I shoot advertising -- I couldn't care less about paper thin DOF. Most of what I do is shot between f5.6 and f16. YMMV.

Quote

Just look at a NEX with a telephoto lens, the size of the body is becoming less important, because it's the lens that makes up the bulk. Then there is the handling issue for serious work with a camera. I think most people would get a cramp in their hands, if they have to cover a sport event for 2 hours with a NEX+telephoto-lens.

Always use the right tool or the job. I don't think many people will be covering the Super Bowl with a Sony NEX.

Quote

On the other hand, these systems are nice to go hiking ...

They are also great if you are holding a camera for 8 hours during a commercial shoot. Some Pros are talking about dumping their DSLRs for mirrorless. My primary lenses are 24mm and 85mm primes. A NEX 7 and a 24mm f1.8 Zeiss weight about 20 Oz total.

Quote

People who do not care that much about IQ, will buy a smaller camera ...

People who don't care will use their phones. The P&S market is dying. And not many people will "step up" from Smart Phones to real cameras.

Quote

I think there is room for an APS-C or even FF EVIL-camera in the rangefinder style. SONY is close to this, but the ergonomics of the NEX sucks.

Since I got my NEX 5n my Canon DSLRs don't get much use. When I pick-up a NEX 7 I doubt they will get any use.

Quote

If I were Canon, I would take some time to find the ideal sensor-size for a future EVIL-System. It is not an easy task...

APS-C is the perfect size. Canon needs to get their act together and make a small and light Pro quality camera. It doesn't need to be mirrorless, a Digital EOS IX (an APS film camer from the 1990s) would be great with a EF 85mm f1.8. or a new 22mm f1.8 EF-S.

Logged

briansquibb

APS-C is the perfect size. Canon needs to get their act together and make a small and light Pro quality camera. It doesn't need to be mirrorless, a Digital EOS IX (an APS film camer from the 1990s) would be great with a EF 85mm f1.8. or a new 22mm f1.8 EF-S.

I have a EOS IX - I bought it as a travel camera. Still works OK. I have a 85 f/1.8 as well it would be very interesting combination. I suspect the APS quality would be disappointing now though I did run a cassette through using a 55-200 EF - quality was acceptable. Perhaps I should put 400 f/2.8 IS on it

Logged

kapanak

I have the EVF for the NEX-5N, and although very high resolution and quite impressive, especially with scene preview and live histogram, it still does not have the same natural feeling of an OVF. I don't think mirrorless cameras are meant to replace DSLRs ... mirrored and mirrorless cameras have co-existed since the beginning. They will continue to address different needs in different audiences in the market, and will complement each other in a professional's photography kit.

A DSLR could of course also potentially have a hyrid OVF/EVF aswell to get the advantages from the latter, that and having to balance large zoom lenses will IMHO keep them alive although I do think systems like this new Fuji will take a good deal of the hi end market.

That's the thing. A DSLR, by definition, cannot have an electronic viewfinder at the same time as an optical one. It may have a second, smaller sensor for the EVF component, but we shall not get into that. Of course, OVFs have electronic parts embedded, but it is not a preview of what the sensor is seeing, because of the mirror. It is all about that mirror. Sony has their A65/77, but that lacks an OVF ...

briansquibb

APS-C is the perfect size. Canon needs to get their act together and make a small and light Pro quality camera. It doesn't need to be mirrorless, a Digital EOS IX (an APS film camer from the 1990s) would be great with a EF 85mm f1.8. or a new 22mm f1.8 EF-S.

APS-C is the perfect size. Canon needs to get their act together and make a small and light Pro quality camera. It doesn't need to be mirrorless, a Digital EOS IX (an APS film camer from the 1990s) would be great with a EF 85mm f1.8. or a new 22mm f1.8 EF-S.

Here you are - EOS IX + 85 f/1.8

I have never seen a camera like that before! That's amazing! Thanks for sharing.

Without a mirror - lenses can be so much smaller though which would be a big help.

My top priority in a camera is image quality of course - So I will not sacrifice sensor size, ISO performance or lens quality/speed.

My 2nd is size - Smaller, lighter the better.

That gap is slowly closing. Leica have shown it is very possible - shame they are just so darn expensive!

I look forward to the Fuji reviews - but a small canon large sensor camera would be great for flash compatibility.

APS-C is the perfect size. Canon needs to get their act together and make a small and light Pro quality camera. It doesn't need to be mirrorless, a Digital EOS IX (an APS film camer from the 1990s) would be great with a EF 85mm f1.8. or a new 22mm f1.8 EF-S.

Here you are - EOS IX + 85 f/1.8

Thanks, briansquibb. I'd buy two. if Canon made a Digital EOS IX!

A Digital EOS IX (EOS XD?) with a 7D/7DmkII sensor would be a BIG seller, IMHO. Lots of great EF-S and EF lenses could be used with a Digital EOS IX.

It would be quite a breakthrough if they could reproduce this model for the XXXD, though I'm not sure how that would work while still retaining the mirror and the OVF.

Why not? - this has a mirror. The camera body is VERY light and small - about 4/3 size

132 x 80 x 59 mm, is the official size of the EOS IX. 128.8 x 97.5 x 61.9mm is for T1i . The EOS IX is actually longer than the T1i. The T1i is thicker due to the much bigger grip. The difference in height is substancial due to the Prisum on the T1i. reference: Canon museum.

briansquibb

132 x 80 x 59 mm, is the official size of the EOS IX. 128.8 x 97.5 x 61.9mm is for T1i . The EOS IX is actually longer than the T1i. The T1i is thicker due to the much bigger grip. The difference in height is substancial due to the Prisum on the T1i. reference: Canon museum.